Mit18 701f21 Lect23
Mit18 701f21 Lect23
|Hi | = pei i
for each of these primes. Since G is abelian, conjugating a group produces the same group, so by Sylow II, these
(abelian) subgroups Hi are unique for each prime.
Theorem 23.2
Every abelian group G is isomorphic to a product of groups of prime power order.
H1 × · · · × Hr ,
f : H1 × · · · × Hr −→ G
(x1 , . . . , xr ) 7−→ x1 + · · · + xr .
Lemma 23.3
The homomorphism f is an isomorphism.
114
Lecture 23: Proving the Sylow Theorems
Proof. First, f is a homomorphism because G is abelian and the terms will commute when verifying the
homomorphism property. It is necessary that G is abelian. 81 Next, we know that im(f ) is a subgroup of G
and also contains a copy of Hi for all i82 :
Hi ≤ im(f ) ≤ G
for all i. Thus, pei i divides |im(f )| for each i, and since they are relatively prime, the product
Y
pei i
divides |im(f )|. This forces the image to be the same order as |G|, and thus they must be the same. We can
conclude that f is surjective. Both the domain and image of f have the same size, so it is also injective and an
isomorphism.
As a result, the study of fnite abelian groups can be reduced to studying abelian p-groups. These are completely
understood, and will potentially be covered more in 18.702! In contrast, non-abelian groups are complicated
and not well understood.
|H| = pe .
U 7−→ gU.
Our eventual goal is to fnd a subgroup of G of size pe by looking at stabilizers, as they are always subgroups
of G. We fnd the size of a stabilizer by trying to fnd an orbit of size m, as we then know that the stabilizer
will be order pe .83 We begin with some lemmas. The frst lemma provides information about the size of the set
modulo p.
81 Essentially, since G is abelian, there is really only one way to "combine" the Sylow p-subgroups. When |G| = 10 for a
non-abelian group, we saw that the Sylow subgroups for 2 and 5 could combine in a diferent way to make D10 .
82 Take H ×{1}× · · · {1} to get H ≤ im(f ), for example.
1 1
83 The product of the size of an orbit and the size of the stabilizer is the size of the group G, which here is m · pe .
115
Lecture 23: Proving the Sylow Theorems
Lemma 23.5
Where n = |G| = m · pe , we have that
n
|S| = ̸= 0 (mod p).
pe
Furthermore,
n
≡m (mod p).
pe
Sketch of Proof. The proof is not particularly relevant to group theory and can be proved by expanding the
binomial coefcient and showing that the number of powers of p in the numerator is the same as the denominator.
Alternatively, one could expand (1 + x)n and look at it modulo p.
To reiterate, S consists of all subsets of G of size pe , and these subsets do not have to be subgroups.
Lemma 23.6
Suppose we have a subset U ∈ S a , which is a subset of G. Also, let H be a subgroup of G that stabilizes
U . Then, |H| divides |U |.
a Note that U is an element of S but is itself also a subset of G, so U ⊂ G.
Proof. Since H stabilizes U , for any h ∈ H, we know hU = U . In other words, for each u ∈ U , we have
Hu ⊂ U.
Equivalently, for each u ∈ U , the corresponding right coset of H is a subset of U . This implies that the right
cosets partition U . Since the cosets have the same size, we know that |H| divides |U |.
With these lemmas in hand, we can continue with the proof of the main theorem. The frst lemma tells us that
|S| ̸= 0 (mod p). We know that the orbits partition S, so
Since p does not divide the LHS, there must exist an orbit θ where
gcd(p, |θ|) = 1.
And so pe m = k|Stab(u)| and pe | |Stab(u)| because gcd(k, p) = 1. By the second lemma, |Stab(u)| divides
|u| = pe .
Thus,
|Stab(u)| = pe
and we have found a Sylow p-group.
116
Lecture 23: Proving the Sylow Theorems
Proof of Sylow II. We approach this proof similarly, fnding a nice set and an action on it. Fix H to be a Sylow
subgroup. Our set is X = G/H, the left cosets of H. The index of H is the same as |X|, so |X| = m.
Let K be the subgroup we want to show is a subgroup of H up to conjugation, where |K| = pf . We will look
at how K acts on X by left translation, the mapping:
We decompose into orbits, |X| = |O1 | + · · · + |Or |. Note that these orbits are with respect to the action of
K, not the action of G, as that would be transitive and we’d only have one orbit. We have that |Oi | divides
|K| = pf , but p does not divide m. Thus this orbit decomposition can only work if some orbit O has size 1. In
other words, there exists some coset aH that is fxed by all k ∈ K. Then,
kaH = aH
−1
a kaH = H
−1
a ka ∈ H
−1
a Ka ≤ H
A lot of the work done in these proofs are choosing some set and action, then looking at the orbits and seeing
what we can do what them. The third proof is similar.
Proof of Sylow III. Our set will be Y as the set of Sylow p-subgroups of G. We will be trying to fnd the size
of Y . G acts on Y by conjugation, H 7−→ gHg −1 . By Sylow II, there is only one orbit. Pick a Sylow subgroup
H ∈ Y . Then
|G| = |Stab(Y )||orbit(H)| = |Y ||Stab(Y )|.
This already tells us that |Y | divides |G| = n, but we can say more.
The stabilizer here has a name, the normalizer of H. It turns out that H ≤ Stab(H) because for all h ∈ H,
hHh−1 = H. So | Stab(H)| is divisible by pe = |H|. The counting formula then says that |G| = pe m =
|Y | · (pe · stuf) which implies that |Y | divides m.
The last part is showing that |Y | ≡ 1 (mod p). We now use the action of H on Y by conjugation.
Fact 23.9
Suppose we have another Sylow subgroup H ′ ∈ Y , H ′ is fxed by H if and only if H = H ′ . In other words,
under the action of H, there is only one fxed point.
117
Lecture 23: Proving the Sylow Theorems
By looking at orbits, there is only one orbit of size 1 because there is only one fxed point. The rest are powers
of p because the size of H is a power of p. Thus the decomposition into orbits looks like
Y = 1 + p + · · · + p2 + · · · + p3 + · · · ≡ 1 (mod p).
118
MIT OpenCourseWare
https://ocw.mit.edu
For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: https://ocw.mit.edu/terms.